Canada’s AI future: Listen well to lead well

The federal government’s current public consultation on artificial intelligence transparency is a welcome continuation of what must become a broader national conversation not only about how AI should be governed, but also what Canadians want it to help accomplish.

Canada has reached a pivotal moment in the adoption of AI: the technology is now moving from experiment to infrastructure. Despite the federal government's increasing use of AI, it is not yet clear how much say the public will have in shaping this transition.

Encouragingly, the government has recently begun to seek public input in addition to the advice of AI experts.

On July 23, Ottawa opened a public consultation portal on AI transparency, inviting Canadians to weigh in on how AI-generated content should be identified, when AI interactions should be disclosed, and how serious incidents should be tracked. Together with the new "AI for All" strategy, this is a welcome continuation of what must become a broader national conversation, not only about how AI should be governed, but also what Canadians want it to help accomplish.

So far, much of the public discussion on AI has understandably focused on its potential harms. At times, this has drifted into doomerism. Yet, leaders who listen carefully will also hear a quieter note of hope. Many Canadians see in AI the potential to tackle national problems that have persisted for generations.

While Canadians have different immediate concerns, many of our aspirations are shared: quality health care, effective education, safe communities, and economic prosperity. With the right choices, AI could help us make meaningful progress toward them in our own time. There is a real political opportunity in listening to ordinary citizens and giving them a role in shaping this country’s direction. 

In previous articles, we argued that Canada needs a clear strategy to integrate AI into public infrastructure and a serious plan for the disruption it will bring. At the heart of that strategy should be a simple principle: Canadians must not passively inherit an AI future designed elsewhere. We should decide together what we want this technology to accomplish, and how it can advance the goals we share.

Former Saskatchewan premier Tommy Douglas once said, "Where there is no vision, a people perish." The old Prairie spirit that brought communities together to build wheat pools and Medicare is not gone. In fact, regional alienation is often rooted in the same basic desires: to be heard, to protect what matters locally, and to offer our children a better future. Canadians share many of the same ambitions, yet we cannot ignore the reality that provinces, territories, Indigenous governments, and small municipalities face unique conditions that cannot be reduced to a national average. After all, Canada was designed to achieve unity, not uniformity. 

During the Confederation debates, Sir Étienne-Paschal Taché argued that local governments should be able to manage their domestic affairs “as they deemed best.” 

AI policy should follow the same logic, allowing Ottawa to co-ordinate shared national priorities while enabling provinces, territories, Indigenous governments, and municipalities to adapt AI tools and programs to their own needs.

In health care, that could mean supporting earlier diagnoses and extending specialized care into rural, northern, and Indigenous communities. In education, it could mean supporting personalized learning and helping teachers prepare students for a changing economy. In public safety, it is the detection of cyberattacks, wildfires, and other emerging threats. Across the economy, it means helping workers and businesses adapt while supporting communities through the disruption that AI will likely bring.  

None of this will happen automatically. Technology does not set political priorities. People do. Therefore, AI used by government should serve the same basic purpose as government itself: to improve citizens’ lives while protecting their security, rights, and freedoms. If Canada is to lead well on AI, its leaders must first listen well to the people they serve.

The transparency portal is open until Sept. 23, 2026. Once it closes, Ottawa should continue the process with regional and sector-specific discussions focused on shared public goals. The government should then publish not only what it heard, but also which priorities it intends to pursue and how progress will be measured. MPs and ministers cannot act on every proposal, but they can identify common aspirations, build coalitions around them, and translate them into practical policy. 

Listening, by itself, is not leadership, but it is where legitimate leadership begins. Canada’s AI future will ultimately be shaped not by technology alone, but by the choices Canadians make together.

Alexander Landry is a research fellow with the Institute for Peace & Diplomacy, and holds an MA in international affairs from King’s College London. Brendan Conway-Smith, PhD, is a cognitive scientist specializing in artificial intelligence and metacognition. He is an affiliated scientist with Harvard Medical School.

The Hill Times